From Lockheed Martin to the Congressional Budget Office, it seems like everyone has a proposal for how to change the VSE. With a Congressional party change foreseen for the coming US elections, it seems plausible that elements of these alternatives may soon make their way to the House and Senate floors.

These alternative visions are backed by hard technical data and are vetted or created by industry experts. The plans attempt to solve or avoid the perceived budgetary and technical risks of NASA’s chosen path.

In this two-part series, we will examine five recently proposed alternatives to NASA’s VSE program. In this first installment, we will examine a Shuttle derived launcher alternative to NASA’s Ares I and V vehicles.

DIRECT is pitched in a 33 page technical proposal, CG video, and computer simulation, at a level of visual and technical detail reminiscent of official NASA VSE announcements. All aspects of the project from 20 year budget projections to launch pad footprint specifications are presented.

The new concept would replace the Ares I and Ares V launch vehicles with a single shuttle-derived ‘Universal Launcher’, which would perform both roles and reduce the risks and costs associated with producing two boosters.

The ‘Universal Launcher’ would develop a single booster capable of lifting 70 tonnes in a baseline configuration or 98 with an upper stage (compared to about 22 tonnes for Ares 1 and 131 for Ares V). The Universal Launcher removes many launcher development costs, and consolidates all flight operations to one vehicle.

The booster uses 4-segment SRBs, eliminating 5-segment development costs and requiring minimal modification to existing launch infrastructure. This could potentially reduce the overall risk, cost and length of the Constellation program.

The DIRECT vehicle uses significantly more Shuttle heritage than the Ares system. The design uses two 4-segment Shuttle SRBs, and the core stage diameter would remain the same as the Shuttle’s existing ET. This Shuttle commonality translates into far fewer infrastructure changes than the wider core and the longer five segment SRBs NASA proposes.

The vehicle initially uses RS-68 engines, as used in the Delta IV. In later variants the RS-68s could be modified with a regeneratively cooled nozzle, increasing Isp and payload performance.

This single-vehicle approach would allow almost 50 extra tonnes of cargo to be launched on every crew flight. Instead of simple ISS crew rotation, DIRECT has the capacity to support Shuttle-like crew-supported payload delivery. It would simultaneously provide enough heavy-lift capability to easily fulfill lunar or Mars mission requirements. One vehicle also significantly reduces the risk of political cancellation faced by Ares V.

The DIRECT solution is projected to save over $35 billion over Ares through 2025. Non-recurring vehicle development savings alone are estimated at $19 billion, with over $1 billion in savings each year thereafter in operating and infrastructure costs. These savings could be applied either to accelerating Constellation or to re-energize the gutted NASA science budget.

The Constellation program has already been delayed to its first flight occurring late in 2014, as first reported by this website last week. The DIRECT launcher offers an opportunity to re-accelerate this schedule to Mike Griffin’s initially stated goal of fielding Orion in mid-2012 – and from a propulsion point of view, lunar missions would be possible at that time, not late in 2019.

The Universal Launcher approach claims to save time and money – two variables that NASA does not currently have in large quantities – and allows NASA to field a more capable and flexible launch system earlier than originally planned.